Half Off Hypothetical Rule Change

[sayingsorry]

How would you feel if Half Off added a 4th item choice instead of $1000 for a perfect 3/3 and if they got it right they won the 10k instantly.

I personally don't like how you can play a perfect game and still only win $1000 and not the main prize.

Thoughts?

[ooboh]

How would you feel if Half Off added a 4th item choice instead of $1000 for a perfect 3/3 and if they got it right they won the 10k instantly.

I personally don't like how you can play a perfect game and still only win $1000 and not the main prize.

Thoughts?

Meh, that’s just the beauty of the game. Most games are straightforward enough: “guess the price and win” (Double Prices, Clock Game, Grand Game, etc.), but others have elements of luck or skill and knowing prices alone aren’t enough to win (like the aforementioned 1/2 Off, Plinko, or probably the most infamous one, Hole in One). While I would be lying if I said that game mechanic didn’t annoy me from time to time, I do like the diversity of game rules on the show. The Showcase Showdown has literally NOTHING to do with guessing prices, but it’s been on the show for like 46 years.

[LiteBulb88]

On the one hand, this would be more fair to the contestant. On the other hand, on the occasions the contestant got all 4 SPs right, it would completely ruin the best part of the game, which is the reveal at the end. Given that The Price is Right, like almost all TV shows, is in business first and foremost to entertain viewers, I vote to keep 1/2 Off as is.

[ThatDonGuy]

How would you feel if Half Off added a 4th item choice instead of $1000 for a perfect 3/3 and if they got it right they won the 10k instantly.

I personally don't like how you can play a perfect game and still only win $1000 and not the main prize.

Thoughts?

My first thought was, "No, not for a $10,000 prize," but then, look at all of the games that offer things like trips to Europe now worth over $10,000 that can be won with "perfect play."

There are three games I can think of off the top of my head where you can know all of the prices in advance and not win anything more than some small prices: Secret "X", Plinko, and 3 Strikes.
If you want to include games besides 1/2 Off where the guarantee is $1000 or less, here are a few:
Pass the Buck ($1000, and even then, you may have to want to stop and keep it)
Let 'em Roll ($500)
Punch-A-Bunch (what's the smallest amount now - $250?)
Rat Race (only the smallest prize is guaranteed)
Hole in One...or Two (yes, it's possible to miss from the closest line, although I have not seen anyone miss twice)

[TPIRfan#9821]

I'm aggressively neutral about it. On the one hand, budget, and trips that are 10k+ are partially sponsored and could be forfeited, unlike cash which is 100% going to be accepted in full. On the other hand, goal of the show is to award smart shopping. I personally am more in the camp of just let tradition be, but if it changed, I wouldn't really care.

Or you can go full on moneygamelover's signature and enforce that every game with an element of luck to either allow a win with perfect pricing, or if impossible, retire the game (except for 3 Strikes).

[123123123]

Personally I am all for the excitement of the 50/50. Perfect pricing in every game (except 3 Strikes) should get you something but not necessarily everything, and the $1,000 does a good job of filling the requirement.

Bit of a tangent, but I feel its similar enough to mention here. What are thoughts on allowing contestants to win by making 3 in a row anyway they please in Secret X, with or without the secret x? Requires some risk and makes the game name somewhat misleading, but gives the opportunity to guarantee a win if one believes that most games should have such an option.

[Roadgeek Adam]

50/50 is fine. Stack needs the 4th GP set more than half needs a 4th SP set

[JayC]

^Completely agree on Stack needing a 4th GP set more.

A 50/50 chance at $10,000 is still really good odds if the contestant gets all three SP pairs correct. And $1,000 is a decent consolation prize if they pick the wrong box, it's not like the pre-Drew days where the contestant got nothing if they got all 3 pairs correct then chose the wrong box.

[gamesurf]

If you don't have the reveal, there's little point in playing Half Off. You're cutting out the most exciting part of the game for the viewers.

On paper, a contestants might lose all four punches in Punch-a-Bunch and ruin the game. In practice, this never happens, because the producers know why people want to watch Punch-a-Bunch, and it isn't the pricing portion. If you add a fourth pair of SPs to Half Off, those who are setting the game up now have to make sure that most contestants are likely to miss at least one pair of SPs, so the reveal doesn't become trivial. Which has the same effect as just keeping three pairs of SPs to begin with.

A 50/50 chance at $10,000 is still really good odds

It's not quite 50:50. It looks like 50:50 on paper, but in practice it isn't. Producers know not every box has an equal chance of being selected. If the producers want Half Off to be won, it will be very likely won.

During Big Money Week a few years ago, Half Off was played for $50,000. The contestant got all three pairs of SPs right. The final two boxes where the $50,000 might have been hid were were Box #5 (which was green, the color of money) or Box #13. The entire audience was screaming at him in unison one number. Guess which box he picked and guess where the $50,000 was?

[Flerbert419]

There are three games I can think of off the top of my head where you can know all of the prices in advance and not win anything more than some small prices: Secret "X", Plinko, and 3 Strikes.

This question with some additional retired games is actually answered in the FAQ.